Paper 1 - Attachment Flashcards
What is reciprocity ? Give research
- conversational body language; babies moving in rhythm with adults and take turns (Coordinations)
- ellicit
- Brazelton et al: suggested that this basic rhythm is important precursor to later communications - the sensitivity between the reactions lays the foundation of the attachment
What is interactional synchrony and give supporting research ?
Meltzoff and Moore discovered this to be when infants (2-3) imitate specific facial expressions and hand gestures
- adult model displayed a gesture and the dummy was placed in the infants mouth (prevents initial response), dummy removed and child’s expression was filmed - they found association between the infant behaviour and the adult model
- Meltzoff and Moore also suggested this interaction was at 3 days old, showing its innate and not learnt
Murray et al prevented synchrony in a study and the child was in acute distress, showing the child is active and it is not general
Real or pseudo limitation ?
- Meltzoff and Moore suggested that this imitation was intentional and deliberate.
- however Piaget believed the only true imitation was towards the end of the first year and anything before = response training (infant is rewarded when doing the behaviour - behaviourist)
Evaluate research into caregiver-infant interactions ?
- problems with testing infant behaviour: doubting findings as difficulties in reliability testing- the gestures tested are frequently displayed in infants so it’s difficult to distinguish whether or not they were specifically imitated (if the person judging the behaviour has no idea regarding the aim it could increase the internal validity)
- failure to replicate: other studies have failed to replicate (M+M argued due to lack of control).
Marian et al showed that infants could distinguish from live and videotaped interactions with their mothers so they are not actually responding to the adult (could’ve been procedural issues) - individual differences; Isabella et al: some variation between infants : more strongly attached individuals had greater interactional synchrony and those who have more imitations tend to have a better quality of relationships (but can’t establish cause and effect)
- Valuable research: connection between what the infant sees and their imitation of this - infants associate their own acts and their mental state (e.g. the theory of mind: theory of mind - understanding their mental states, then others which will contribute to conducting social relationships (explains how infants think and feel)
Describe the role of the father in primary attachment figures
Schaffer and Emerson found that fathers were less likely to be primary attachment figures than the mothers because they spend less time with the infants.
- This is also because men lack emotional sensitivity than women offer (biological or social factors). Women have oestrogen which underlines caring behaviour which are more orientated towards interpersonal
- HOWEVER Frodi et al showed videotaped of infants crying and found no physiological differences
- men do have the capability of primary attachment (if single (male) parent families ) and often share the role of primary attachment (Frank) but social/biological factors may discourage this I
Describe the role of fathers in secondary attachments
- research highlighted that fathers are more playful and physically active which provides challenging situation for children whereas mothers are more conventional (Geiger)
- lack of sensitivity from fathers which can be seen as positive as it fosters problem solving by making greater communicative and cognitive demands in children
Describe the procedure of Schaffer and Emmerson’s study
- conducted a study in Glasgow with 60 babies and studied them until 1
- mothers visited every 4 weeks; report any stranger/separation anxiety (rated on a 4 point scale)
Describe the findings of Schaffer and Emmerson’s studies
Stage 1 - indiscriminate attachment (0-2 months):
- infants respond similarly to both humans and inanimate objects
- end of period: greater preference for social stimuli
- reciprocity and interactional synchrony are really important in the process
Stage 2 - Attachment stage (in the making) (4 months):
- infants prefer human company and will distinguish between familiar + unfamiliar
- no stranger anxiety and quality over quantity
Stage 3 - Discriminate attachment (7 months):
- shows separation protest/anxiety; will be happy in reunion
- forms a monotropic attachment (3% with only the father)
Stage 4 - Multiple attachments (8 months):
- after one month of monotropic attachment, will form secondary attachments with other caregivers (father) - 29% had done by this stage and rose to 78% within 6 months
Evaluate Scaffer and Emmerson’s research
Unreliable: based on mothers reports which means it could be biased and they may be less aware of it
Sample biased: working class, Glasgow (cultural biased and inapplicable) - also during 1960’s where the women’s role is very different to how it is now
Cultural variations: collectivist= sharing responsibility; more likely to form multiple attachments - the theory may only be applicable to individualist societies (less social need and more likely to form PCG) - supported by Sagi et al closeness in attachment was twice as common in family based arrangements than communal
Stage theories: described to be fixed whereas some research suggests that some children form multiple attachments before a singular attachment - different orders depending on the individual
Describe Lorenz’s studies into attachment
- Used gosling eggs and split them into two group; some would hatch with their biological mother and some would hatch in an incubator (with Lorenz as the first person they saw)
- geese began to follow around Lorenz
- labelled as imprinting: occurred in the critical period and infant creates a special attachment with the first person they see (even when the geese were split up, they still were drawn to the person they saw first)
- this became sexual imprinting: changing preferences which were irreversible and long lasting and mated with the same kind of object they were imprinted with
Evaluate Lorenz’s study
Research supporting imprinting - chicks were imprinted with an attachment to rubber gloves - they began to try and mate with them (not born with a specific type of object) - shows that early imprinting is linked to later reproductive behaviour
HOWEVER… the effects were not lang lasting as when they placed them with their mother, the effects disappeared (therefore shows potential learning elements, which are very fast)
Describe Harlow’s research with rhesus monkeys
- monkeys were placed in a cage with two artificial mother models (one was made just of wire, the other had a cloth for comfort purposes)
- he observed to see how much time they spent with - found the monkeys spent majority of the time with the comfort model (comfort>food)
- also scared them with a mechanical bear and they went to the cloth covered mother (reassurance and comfort)
- they spent a short time with the wire mother (just to get food) and then returned to the cloth-covered mother
- findings suggest that infants value comfort more than feeding
- long lasting effects: many consequences of their early attachment experiences - reported all of them had social and sexual abnormalities - but there was significance of a critical period: if they spent time with peers they seemed to recover (but only before 3 months old)
Evaluate Harlow’s research
Confounding variables: the two monkeys had different heads (this varied systematically with the IV) - perhaps the results were due to the cloth-covered model having a more attractive head (lacks internal validity)
Ethics: the study caused long term emotional harm to the monkeys however it may be justified as it can be used to generate conclusions based on the processes of attachment and applies these to avoid the same thing in humans (do benefits outweigh costs?)
Evaluate using animal research as a whole
- cannot generalise animal research to humans as humans are perhaps more governed by conscious decisions and higher awareness
HOWEVER… Schaffer and Emmerson found similar things in there study (quality over quantity) - animal studies provide useful guidelines regardless of whether they can be completely applied
Describe the learning approach
- proposes that all behaviour is learnt and attachment is formed through operant and classical conditioning
CLASSICAL - believed the mother acted a neutral stimulus but is gradually conditioned with food (UCS) (produces milk) and this will result in pleasure (UCR) - eventually leading to the mother producing pleasure
OPERANT
- Miller believed attachment was due to drive reduction.
- The drive = motivation for food and when the infant was fed, the drive is reduced so therefore behaviour leading to this would be repeated in order to be rewarded again
- food therefore acts a primary enforcer
Evaluate the learning approach
- heavily based on animal studies: behaviourists believe that the same stimulus-response mechanism is in both animals and humans but non-behaviourists believe human has a more complex association (which is influenced by free will and other factors like innate predisposition) - this therefore means the approach lacks validity as it may not be applicable to humans
- contact comfort is more important: unsupporting research from Harlow - the monkeys chose a cloth-covered model over a feeding model. Schaffer and Emmerson also found that the quality of the interaction was more important than food - therefore disagrees with the learning approach’s main assumption
- Alternative explanation: greater, more detailed approach which explains why attachments are formed rather than just how and why attachment is advantageous for the infant
- problems with drive reduction: it can only explain a limited number of behaviours - loads of behaviours are not done to reduce discomfort (bungee jumping is done - high discomfort)
What was Bowlby’s main assumptions?
Assumes that attachment is innate and instinctive and aids survival and protection because no attachment means no protection
Describe Bowlby’s theory of monotropic attachment
Monotropic attachment: proposed infants will form one special bond with the primary caregiver during the critical period. They may form secondary attachments towards the end (with father) - forms emotional safety net of secondary attachments
Referred to the critical period: occurs between 3-6 months and if attachment does not occur within this period, it will never be formed (receptive to synchrony and sensitivity)
Requires social releasers: innately born with releasers (smiling and crying) this allows them to communicate feelings (which allow the parent to respond appropriately)
CONSEQUENCE:
Internal working model: gives child an insight into the caregivers behaviour to enable influence and provides a blue print for future behaviours (expectations)
Continuity hypothesis: proposes that individuals who have a positive internal working model (and positive expectations) due to secure attachment will have higher social and emotional competency in adulthood
Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of monotropic attachment
- evidence: Minnesota child-parent study found children who had secure infancy attachments had secure adult attachments (supports the continuity hypothesis) - HOWEVER… alternatively, as this is correlational it lacks validity so therefore Kagan proposes an alternative variable may be an infant’s temperament (innate) ( was explored through Rovine’s research that some babies have behavioural instability) have and this would explain that difficult babies tend to develop insecure attachments which would be later reflected in adulthood
- critical period is sensitive rather than critical: Bowlby emphasised the need for an attachment to form within the critical period. Research from Rutter suggest it is not impossible to form attachments outside of the critical period - should be a sensitive period as it reflects a developmental window where the child is more receptive to to form an attachment (Koulachova et al two twins locked in a cupboard then adopted in loving family and recovered fully)o
- multiple attachments cannot be formed first (Bowlbys idea) : he underestimated the need for secondary relationships in development but he did acknowledge that they contribute to healthy development (bring in the role of the father)
What was Ainsworth’s Strange Situation procedure?
- controlled lab experiment with 100 infants of American middle class
- had eight different episodes to highlight certain behaviours (stranger anxiety) which enabled observation of interaction
- The mother and baby would play, mother would leave and then a stranger would enter, then mother returns and reunites.
- Independent observers with standardised behavioural categories they rated out of 7
Describe the findings of the Strange Situation
SECURE
- harmonious and co-operative interactions
- low stranger anxiety but distress in separation (reluctant for them to part but easily to soothe)
- independent explorers of the environment
- showed comfort in reunion
(66%)
INSECURE - RESISTANT
- both seeks and resists intimacy from their mother
- immediate and intense distress in separation and high stranger anxiety
- conflicting desires in reunion (seeks and rejects)
- can’t explore own behaviour
(12%)
INSECURE - AVOIDANT
- children who tend to avoid social interaction and intimacy
- little response to separation and reunion
- indifferent with stranger
- little/no tendency to cling or resist to distance
- happy to explore independently
- high levels of anxiety in the child
(22%)
Strengths of the strange situation
High reliability: 94% agreement between the highly experienced judges so therefore confident in the behaviours shown
Applications: helped develop understanding of child’s signals and anxiety and therefore can lead to improvement in children’s lives; increased infants classed as securely attached from 32% to 40% - improving children’s lives- circle of security project (Cooper et al)
Large sample sizes (although in comparison to entire countries , pretty small)
Weaknesses of the Strange Situation
Low internal validity: Weston et al found differences in behaviour depending on the parent they were interacting with; this therefore means that the classification of the attachment is invalid and not a personal characteristic but just a relationship with one parent (however Bowlby said that it was the mother’s influence which was most significant - as they are the PCG - this was supported by Main’s research
Maternal sensitivity: theory believes that attachment is determined by maternal sensitivity but research showed a low correlation between the two - style could be determined by a child’s temperament (Kagan) which may override the effects of maternal sensitivity
Main & Solomon: found a fourth classification group showing not all children fit into 3 distinct categories; type D attachment from 200 SS tapes
Real world applications
- intervention strategies: circle of security project that found a better understanding of signals will promote more secure attachments (32% to 40% increase in secure attachments)
Cultural variation (see other cards): differences in responses imposed etic
Describe Van Izendoorn and Kroonenberg’s attachment research
- meta-analysis of 32 studies and 2000 strange situations across several countries
- findings were similar to Ainsworths ; 65%= secure
21%= avoidant
14%= resistant
